In Phaedrus, love is power. So powerful, in fact, that it dictates future relationships based on past relationships. It clouds judgment and decision-making. Perhaps to the point that the lover cannot be trusted. Essentially, nonlovers have control of their feelings, lovers do not. I think this is used as an example by Plato because love is such a strong emotion. The discourse by Lysias to support these claims references examples that Socrates does not refute, but rather calls repetitive. "It seemed to me, Phaedrus, unless you disagree, that he [Lysias] said the same thing two or three times, as if he did not find it easy to say many things about one subject, or perhaps he did not care about such a detail; and he appeared to be in youthful fashion to be exhibiting his ability to say the same thing in two different ways and in both ways excellently." (p. 143). Phaedrus, on the other hand, believes that Lysias has not omitted any points. Love may be the focus of the discourse, because discussions about love can be highly rhetorical and Phaedrus seems just as excited about the discourse as he does about the subject.
Regarding true and false rhetoric, I was immediately reminded of the passage on page 52 of The Rhetorical Tradition. "....because whenever a statement is made, if the event has taken place in the way indicated by the statement, the statement is true; but if the event has not taken place in the way indicated, the same statement is false". What? Isn't that obvious? I think there was so much free time back then, that words were sometimes used just to entertain. I have to think that in order to understand what sounds like nonsense. But, I can also appreciate the fact that these philosophers and rhetoricians were trying to understand and create new knowledge. It's easy for me to be critical with an 'armchair quarterback' perspective. Much of our knowledge and perspective now is added to existing knowledge. It was not that way during this classical rhetorical time.
In terms of true and false 'rhetoric' specifically, I view that as more about how the rhetoric is being used. Namely for the good of the masses, or the benefit of a few. Situating this in my field of science, I can think of examples of scientific concepts being communicated to the public, versus scientific jargon being used to manipulate the views of the audience to sell a product or promote an idea. This so-called 'pseudoscience' is an example of false rhetoric. The arguments may have some validity, but they are connected in ways that invalidate the argument as a whole.
Interestingly, Plato contextualizes Socrates and Phaedrus as lovers of wisdom, so love can, in this sense, shine a bright light toward the path of truth and wisdom. Ultimately, Plato seems to be arguing that self-love comes from self-knowledge, and this kind of love does not blind; it helps people (lovers) see with greater clarity and gives them insight into what's good and just.
ReplyDelete"Situating this in my field of science, I can think of examples of scientific concepts being communicated to the public, versus scientific jargon being used to manipulate the views of the audience to sell a product or promote an idea. This so-called 'pseudoscience' is an example of false rhetoric." So true! How many hucksters have we seen hawking products on TV or sci-fi fantasies dressed up as philosophy or religion.
ReplyDelete